Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by Mr.K, Mar 25, 2011.
Well the collar points are "above" the v-neck, so there you go...
From the number of postings that are listed on your profile, I would posit that you've not been around these parts for very long. As it is, when I started making photo postings, when I first joined SF, they might well have qualified for your request for "more panache", but they were, in retrospect, a bit over the top (occasionally, a bit more than a bit over the top).
I've since learned that less can be more.
However, as a design challenge, I will see if I can make some postings in the near future that might be a bit more daring - somewhere closer to your idea of "panache", but not raising the alarms among the other regular posters here - a juggling act, to be sure.
Has anyone ever told you that you look like CS Lewis?
Yes, Crusty, it's high time you stopped being such a nudnik.
Off to a christmas part (office-based)
not shown: blackwatch plaid pants and black wingtips (alden for BB, plaza last).
edit: proof that adopting the "spoo pose" does not make one as skilled as spoo.
Cheers! I'm thinking about putting one in the Europe TSB
You're right about the SC, I've got another one (exact same model/pattern/colour etc) in a bigger size that fits better (as dumb as it sounds I actually picked the wrong one from the closet today). As for the belt, I guess surcingle is not everyone's cup of tea. It's one of my favourite casual belts though.
True you forgot the trademark ring.
Yeah, I use my hands to much for a big ring...
Might get caught in some rotating machinery.
Thanks for the kind words in the thumbs-up. Sheepy, you have hair on your head. I refuse to feel sorry for you. Crust, the phrase "rough tweed" lends itself to inappropriate puns and entendre. I shall rise above.
It's worth the visit to your "My Tumblr" to see the up close shots of the raw silk tie.
Well seems again I've caused a ruckus! I wonder what SF members would have said to the first appearance of French cuffs in the late 18th or early 19th century . They are just as similarly superfluous and ostentatious yet from today's perspective completely "normal" and acceptable. Fashion is a continuum, not a stasis and w/o pushing the boundaries nothing evolves, nothing changes and we would all still be dressing exactly the same way for the last 300-400 years. The currently acceptable skinny/slim suits are mostly ridiculous and asinine as well; often worn by those who should not be wearing them. A couple years from now and they will also be equally as out of fashion as say bellbottoms or a Cincinnati necktie. But they do not strive to follow classic men's tailoring and thus get a pass. In the same way, my shirt and ensemble on the whole has nothing to do w/ classic men's wear. I have plenty of that shit and don't see the point in continually posting pix of the same classic look, with aped stylistics and a sycophantic need for approval. We're supposed to be having a conversation....where's the hate on the Duke of Windsor's fucked up patterns, Karl Lagerfeld's motorcycle chic, Ann D's 15 buckle shoes or Raf's 35 foot long f'ng shoelace shoes? They are all sufficiently "ridiculous". I'll make a point in the future to post more "approved" fits, but the comments say much more about yourselves than they do about me... given the amount of hub-bub and occasional vitriol you would think I had defamed your dead mothers or something. Points taken and appreciated... as you were gentlemen.
I think those skinny lapeled suits are ridiculous as well.... and do not condone.
You don't really know what we do, here, do you..?
well after reading many of your insipid posts and viewing your equally uninspired fits, as far as you're concerned, I suppose you are correct sir! or should I say #3?
Separate names with a comma.